Completely diverse in perception of the series, and it is not about the fact that they are fundamentally different, but about how much you penetrate each of the parts of this story, how successfully its cinematic embodiment, immersion in details. Part 1 is a crime, part 2 is a punishment and how the incident affected the boy, his inner world and his relationship with others, as well as how the public perceived the information. I had the impression that all the forces were thrown on the tip and the story of the crime from the point of view of the criterion of persuasiveness, although certain shortcomings are still present. And, perhaps, the bet was made on the 1st series and under the impression of what you saw you just have to watch the film to the end, not paying attention to the presentation of material. Or everything is exactly the case and there was no intention to change anything. But nevertheless, this film is not documentary, not biographical, but artistic, respectively, and the demand for it is different, you can not rely on the assumption that the viewer will not be so demanding, strict and sophisticated in much better films. The idea of “only something to fill” is fundamentally wrong, it is important not only the topic touched upon as such, but also what is done to produce the maximum effect on everyone who looked.
|